I have come across this question many times in debates with some of my japanese friends. Yes it is obvious that japan lost the physical war but i believe they were only momentarily set back. I mean if you look at japan now, they are definitely winning the war, not in a physical manner but in an economical one. It seems as though most attempts america makes at building up american companies in japan fail. Although japanese companies have found a way to thrive in the american market in such a way that they put similar american companies out of business. LCD screens are a very good example of what japan can do when they want it from america. LCD screens were originally of american creation but somehow japanese companies got a hold of the technology tested it on their own people until they got the bugs worked out then started to sell them in america for lower prices than the american companies could afford to sell for. Sooner or later the american companies died off or japanese companies bought them out. It seems almost anything the japanese really want to take control of in the america technology wise they can except for fast moving technologies like computer processors.

Am i the only one who sees this as japan actually winning the war in the end because america has laws set in a way that japan can use to gain great wealth from?

Say, this is just my oppinion but I think there are certain things you should not talk about so lightly and I think war is one of those topics. If you want to discuss politics and economics don't relate it to a bloody war that happend a long time ago as bringing that into subject will only distract from the discussion about economics and politics. Also my 50 cent about the economic state of Japan after the war I think the entire helping the "losers / agressors" of the war was one of the best ideas of mankind so far and in my oppionion the biggest attribute of the USA to the rest of the world as it really ended a cycle of hatred.

Is a war really something one side can win or lose? If it is, then Japan undoubtedly lost the war (as you said). How exactly do you define this 'non-physical' war that you're saying Japan ultimately won?

I personally think you're asking the wrong question. If you're asking whether Japan ultimately gained from the end of World War Two and the SCAP administration, then that's a different question altogether (and a less contentious one at that, in my opinion). Have you read anything by John Dower?

Yes it is obvious that japan lost the physical war but i believe they were only momentarily set back. I mean if you look at japan now, they are definitely winning the war, not in a physical manner but in an economical one.

You are letting specious arguments confuse you.

The political entity that was Japan then no longer exists. In the Japan of today, both the Government and the people are totally different. Probably the most marked difference is that the Japanese people today are CITIZENS then they were SUBJECTS.

Besides, what people call Economic War is usually anything but. Japan's Economy is HIGHLY dependent on the US. This goes for ANY country with a deep interest in America. Really, the more US companies foreign countries have invested in, the more DEPENDENT they become on America. People keep on thinking of economics in terms of Mercantilism but the truth is the world economic system is interdependent.

There is no economic war between Japan and the US. Not in the sense that people try to make it. If there were, then winning the war would hurt the winner just as badly as the loser.

Although japanese companies have found a way to thrive in the american market in such a way that they put similar american companies out of business. LCD screens are a very good example of what japan can do when they want it from america.

If our economy does poorly then people don't go buy LCD screens. Then Japan's economy suffers. There is no economic war between our countries, just the standard commercial wars between the involved companies.